Hi Billy, On Oct 31, 2012, at 1:14 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> But suppose that there was a new form of stock ownership. This might be > thought of as "covenant ownership." How this might work is that investors > would be limited to people who sign a legally binding pledge that they are in > fundamental agreement with the goals ands values of the corporation. As part > of the "package," however, the company would pledge itself to maximum > transparency to all shareholders. And perhaps some kind of board of regents > would oversee the workings of the company, specifically concerning how > its operations --of all kinds-- were consistent with its stated ideals. > . > That is, there would be two kinds of "bottom lines." The double-bottom-line is becoming increasingly mainstream: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bottom_line Though, more on the Left (environment) than on the Right (religion). A more concrete example on the Right is what's called a Kingdom Business, which can involve devoting a portion of profits to missions, but can go far beyond that: http://strategic-initiatives.org/pages/publications/KingdomBusinesses.htm > ( 4 ) The company would not be unionized. Its stock ownership program > makes this very problematic to begin with, but more importantly, the pledge > would be two-way. The employer would pledge, legally, to provide decent > and healthy working conditions, fairness in arbitration when that is an issue, > and various protections to workers. However, concerning all unions that > share the basic values of the business, the objective would be maximum > co-operation, for example, with vendors, shippers, and suppliers. You should also look at Mondragon, which is the most scalable solution I've seen for employee-stewardship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation -- Ernie P. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
